House of Commons Hansard #149 of the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was regard.

Topics

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

Mr. Speaker, the principles of this House are that the values we hold high are inculcated into our legislation. An important program like this should be inculcated into the principles and fundamental values of our country and of this government.

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:05 p.m.

Winnipeg North Manitoba

Liberal

Kevin Lamoureux LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments.

As my colleague knows, there will be so many benefits from the passage of this legislation, but I would ask him to provide his thoughts in terms of the historical meaning of passing Bill C-35 and putting into place a truly nationwide program that is going to benefit children from coast to coast to coast.

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

Mr. Speaker, we can be part of a substantial change in the values of Canada, how we stand for the values of education of children and the values of enabling women to become more active in our economy. It is an opportunity that many of us will look back on with a tremendous amount of pride.

This is a pivotal change in very important values and it is reinforcing things that are important.

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:05 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that a number of the Conservative members have made good points about the need to adapt to people who have shift work or do not work nine to five. Mostly, it is moms who look after kids but it could be either parent.

I wonder if, as this legislation proceeds, we have any sense whether the government will be prepared to accept amendments at committee.

I strongly support this legislation, just to be clear, but we do have to make sure that the $10-a-day day care reaches the people who need it most, who are often those in insecure jobs in the gig economy.

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:05 p.m.

Liberal

Tony Van Bynen Liberal Newmarket—Aurora, ON

Mr. Speaker, it is important that we allow programs like this to mature and as opportunities or challenges face us, let us not underestimate the ability of the Canadian people to find solutions. Let us allow the program to mature. There will be solutions. We just heard about a previous program in 24-7. Let us not underestimate the ability and innovation that people present.

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:10 p.m.

Parkdale—High Park Ontario

Liberal

Arif Virani LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of International Trade

Mr. Speaker, as I rise today, one day after the sixth anniversary of the terrorist attack at the Quebec City mosque, I just want to acknowledge the loss that occurred on that day six years ago, the other five lives that have been taken by Islamophobic attacks in this country and the work that we all need to do as parliamentarians and as Canadians to fight against hatred and intolerance, in particular Islamophobia.

I rise today to participate in today's debate, not just because it is the first day of the session, not just because I am glad to be back in the chamber and glad to be back surrounded by parliamentarians seeking to advance the interests of our country and of our individual ridings, but because it actually reminded me of a conversation I had in 2019. That conversation was on a street in my riding in Roncesvalles Village and I remember encountering a family.

It was election time. It was the 2019 election. I was going door to door, as so many of us do every election period. I was confronted with a family. I had a very blunt conversation with the female lead of that family, the mother of that family.

She said to me that we have done so much work and that we continue to do so much work putting women at the forefront of things like international development assistance, women's reproductive rights and so many different initiatives, including a gender-equal cabinet. She said to me, quite candidly, that if we were really sincere about women and women's empowerment, we need to resolve child care.

I said to her that this was fair. I appreciated that criticism.

She elaborated. She said that we cannot really empower women's full participation in the workforce, whether as an entrepreneur, as a salaried employee in a public or private sector setting, unless we alleviate the disproportionate burden on women that relates to raising children.

My riding has a lot of families, a lot of young families and a lot of young kids, and there is a lot of financial burden that goes along with raising those kids. When I was raising my kids, who are now eight-and-a-half and 12, the fees ranged, per child, between $1,500 and $1,800. It is quite common in Toronto to hear of fees that are $2,000 a month.

What I am pleased about today's debate and the subject of what we are discussing is that, yes, after many decades of discussions, thoughts about it, and hearing about agreements that were scuttled at the last minute, etc., finally, this nation and this Parliament are moving past the obstacles in implementing positive change. I think that is critical.

I also want to acknowledge that it was not just individual constituents like mine who had spoken to me in 2019 that provided an impetus, but there was another impetus, an impetus that has become all too familiar to all of us and that is the COVID-19 pandemic. Let me remind us, there were literally families around the country who were dealing with the difficulties of, all of a sudden, shifting their workplace and their educational place for their children and, effectively, substitute day care, all within the confines of their own home, in a matter of weeks, in March and April of 2020.

That is what faced Canadians. I am being very candid here. I think, all of a sudden, it penetrated the brains, particularly, of men in the country, in terms of what a challenge it is to try to have any sort of career or profession, in a virtual setting or otherwise, and have kids running around at all hours of the day, asking about their math homework, where their history homework was, a geography lesson, name it. It was a struggle. That struggle became manifest, I think, for men like me in this country. All of sudden, the level of people's awareness, including my gender's awareness, about the pressing need for a national child care program became that much more acute.

What I like about what we are doing is that we are creating a system where one does not have to choose between building a career and raising a family. That is a false choice. No one should ever be confronted with that. Thankfully, we are now moving toward a stage where one is not. I think that is really important.

It comes with a large price tag. A massive social change and a massive social program are not inexpensive. We readily acknowledge that. When we prioritize families, children and the women who disproportionately share the burden of raising those children, we need to invest. I think that is exactly what we did when we announced this program in our 2021 budget and the $30-billion price tag that would go along with it over the course of the next five years.

What it is going to achieve is to basically take child care that used to cost hundreds of dollars a day and project it to cost $10 a day, on average, across the country by 2026.

Some provinces were very early adopters of this program. It is staggering in terms of its magnitude, in terms of what it could achieve. Some were a bit late to the game and maybe manipulated the electoral cycle for their own purposes, but I do not want to wade into that. We are now at a stage where, of 13 provinces and territories in this country, literally every square kilometre of this country is covered by a child care agreement.

In my own province of Ontario, which I am proud to call home, fees have been reduced, on average, by 50%. Something that might have cost people, doing simple math, if they had their child in child care for 10 months of the year, $17,000 to $20,000 has been cut in half. Thousands of dollars are being saved by Ontarian families in my own riding of Parkdale—High Park. That is staggering, given the number one issue that we all hear when we go door to door now, which is about the cost of living and the crisis of affordability.

If we could return thousands of dollars to families in this country in one single fell swoop, that is reason enough on its own to get behind this kind of legislative initiative. What we are doing is reducing fees in every province and territory. British Columbia, Alberta, Newfoundland and Labrador, P.E.I., New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and NWT have all reduced their fees by an average of 50%.

Saskatchewan, and there were some speakers from Saskatchewan earlier in today's debate, has gone beyond that target, and it has already reached, on average, a 70% reduction of the fees. I was chatting earlier with the member from Winnipeg, the parliamentary secretary to the government House leader. In his province of Manitoba, the fees are currently reduced by 30%, and they are on track to achieve a $10-a-day child care early in the new year. This year, Manitobans will reach $10 a day on average for their child care.

In Yukon and in the province of Quebec, which is really at the forefront of all this in terms of an initiative, regionally, many decades ago, they have had $10-a-day child care. Nunavut joined them in November 2022, three years ahead of schedule.

These are truly incredible results, and they point to what we are doing. I will give one statistic that I am perhaps most proud of. In the speech by the member for Newmarket—Aurora, he talked about labour force participation. He talked about what Quebec had done, where they were about three decades ago, about 4% below the national average for women's participation in the workforce, and that now they are 4% above the Canadian average.

What we know as of right now, in the nascent days of this fledgling program, for women aged 25 to 54, is that 85% of those women are in the workforce right now, and that is 9% ahead of our southern counterparts in the United States of America. That number is only going to grow, which puts proof to the point that was made by my constituent in Parkdale—High Park, when she said to me that if we want to fully believe and allow for women's participation and their economic potential to be increased, we need to implement this kind of program. That is what we are working towards.

It is not just about the women. It is about the children who are going to benefit from earlier formative education. Again, when I struggled with that grade 4 math class, such as it was, I realized my own limitations as an instructor. As great as parents are in this country, we do not have that formalized training and certification that early childhood educators have.

What are we doing to remedy this? As part of that funding that I articulated, nearly half a billion dollars is dedicated to the training of early childhood educators, to their certification so they are providing more, better, higher-qualified training to our young people. That is a win-win. It is great for the children's development, and it is great for the early childhood instructors, who have a better certification and higher wages as a result. Most importantly, it is better for the women, who can now make not a false choice but a real choice. Some may choose to stay at home, and that is their choice. Some may choose to start that business. Some may choose to return to work. Some may choose to stay at work.

What we are doing in this one fell swoop is empowering and unlocking incredible economic potential on the part of literally half of our country. That is to the benefit of this country. That is to the benefit of our economic output. That is to the benefit of Canadians. That is why I hope that, by legislating this initiative, we concretize it, we solidify it and, I dare say, we make it permanent in this country on a go-forward basis.

That is what Bill C-35 is about. That is why I am happy to stand in support of it.

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:20 p.m.

Conservative

Frank Caputo Conservative Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the people of Kamloops—Thompson—Cariboo.

Before I begin asking my question, I want to recognize Kendra Woodland and the whole women's hockey team that won the winter FISU World University Games. We are obviously very proud of what our women's team accomplished. I congratulate Kendra and the team.

The question for my hon. colleague is this. My father worked shift work, and my mom was largely a homemaker and then did some night courses later to go back to work. My understanding of this bill is that it would not help people who work shift work or people who work in the evenings.

While the Liberals says this would be the cure-all, the panacea, what about people who work shift work? What is going to be done for them? Should we not be crafting a bill that benefits all, rather than just benefiting some?

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the member opposite back to the House and wish him a happy new year.

In response to his question, I would say the details with respect to the bilateral agreements are actually quite critical in this conversation. This point was made earlier by one of his colleagues. In each province, the provincial government has the ability to dictate the terms of how the money will be spent in that given province. In my province of Ontario, it can make a determination that a certain portion of the billions of dollars we have put on the table should be made available for off hours or irregular hours for the child care that might be made available.

What we want is for people to be joining the workforce or rejoining the workforce. If that work takes them to different hours, including night shifts, day care and child care should be made available to them. The response to that type of question really rests with the particular nature of the arrangement between the B.C. provincial government and Canada in terms of signing its bilateral agreement.

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:20 p.m.

Bloc

Simon-Pierre Savard-Tremblay Bloc Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech. He and I are both members of Standing Committee on International Trade. This morning we had a rather turbulent meeting, but all the same, it is always a pleasure to work with him. That is my way of saying that we missed each other over the break.

I think this is a good program, but we have every reason to be wary, because centralist Ottawa has a long-standing habit of encroaching on provincial jurisdictions.

From what we have read, money will be paid, jurisdictions will be respected and so on. However, we know that the devil is often in the details or even in the lack of details. Five years from now, if we want to renew the arrangement, a single missing sentence, poorly worded sentence or misplaced comma could have adverse consequences for the future.

Would the government be open to clearly stating, in writing, that there is a right to opt out with full compensation and with no strings attached?

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:20 p.m.

Liberal

Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the question from my Bloc Québécois colleague, and his work on the Standing Committee on International Trade.

With respect to Quebec, I want to first point out that it has been a leader on this issue for decades. Second, the purpose of this bill is to formalize an agreement that we have already signed with all the provinces and territories.

It is not to invade or formally conflict with the jurisdiction of those various territories or localities or provinces; rather, it is a step taken to ensure that going forward, the necessity of having such a program is emphasized for all Canadians and all parliamentarians. Should a different government of a different political stripe dare to intervene to retract such a program, it would need to take the formal step of changing the legislation. That is a step we desperately hope no future government would ever take, but that is the reason why we are concretizing it as a bill.

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:20 p.m.

NDP

Taylor Bachrach NDP Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague across the way will agree that early childhood educators and other child care workers have been undervalued and underpaid for years and years. This is something in British Columbia that the provincial government has taken some steps to rectify. There is a lot of work left to do, but really what we need is a national approach to ensuring fair working conditions and fair compensation for these educators.

Could my colleague inform the House whether he would support adding an explicit commitment to Bill C-35 to ensure that right across Canada early childhood educators earn the kinds of wages that they deserve for the role that they play in our children's upbringing and development?

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:25 p.m.

Liberal

Arif Virani Liberal Parkdale—High Park, ON

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's concern about conditions. I share that concern. It is a bit of a delicate situation when we are talking about the specific wages provided to educators in a specific domain. The delivery of education is something that is traditionally under the purview of the provinces, but with the bilateral agreements that we are signing, we should be emphasizing that very point.

Canada Early Learning and Child Care ActGovernment Orders

6:25 p.m.

Conservative

Tracy Gray Conservative Kelowna—Lake Country, BC

Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Carlton Trail—Eagle Creek.

I want to start today by thanking child care workers for the important work they do.

In reading the government's new legislation, Bill C-35, I have to say that I am disappointed. Once again, we are seeing the Liberal government choosing to put forward buzzwords and campaign slogans rather than crafting the substantive solutions parents in my community of Kelowna—Lake Country are asking for when it comes to serving their child care needs.

To be clear, this is not a national child care strategy and not a national child care program. It is strictly to subsidize, through the provinces, some families already in the child care system using certain types of child care deemed a priority by the Liberals. It is not universal. This bill in its current form is another missed opportunity for Parliament to work toward creating and staffing actual child care spaces where families could place their children. This bill does not seek to shorten long waiting lists.

What is particularly disappointing is that it is hand-picking the types of child care that are acceptable to the government. While I am disappointed, unfortunately I cannot say that I am surprised. The promise of universal child care has long been an over-promised and never-delivered commitment of the Liberal Party. How do we know? It is because it has promised it since most members of this House were children themselves.

In 1984, the former Liberal prime minister John Turner ordered a national task force to study and implement a federal child care program. It was never created. In 1993, the then future Liberal prime minister Jean Chrétien promised in the Liberal red book a national child care program, and no program was ever delivered.

In 2004, after 10 years of doing nothing on child care, the then new Liberal prime minister Paul Martin promised to spend $5 billion on a national child care program in a last-ditch effort to save his government. Despite winning the 2004 election, no program was ever created.

Canadians are not fooled by the Liberals' over-promised yet under-delivered way they manage. We will continue to hear from the government that it has lowered the cost of child care in Canada, and it has for some, but there needs to be a number of updates made to this legislation to make child care accessible and inclusive, allow parents the freedom to do what works for their family, and to actually make a difference for many. The Conservatives will be working on these.

Just as the Liberals have allowed Canada's once ample supply of children's cold and cough medicine to dwindle to levels so low that parents must now make supply runs to American pharmacies, so too have they allowed a chronic shortage of child care spaces across Canada over the past eight years of their time in government.

The Canadian Union of Public Employees studied the shortage and found that, “in many communities there is only one child care space available for every three children who need it, and waitlists are long.”

The Quebec child care system, the model from their provincial cousins that the federal Liberals have long said they wish to copy, at last count had a wait-list of 51,000 spaces. We know, listening to those operating private child care centres, that many have the resources and space to take more children, but they are continually hampered by the same labour shortage issues repeatedly ignored by the current government in many sectors of our economy and social support networks. Looking again at British Columbia, we see stories of day cares of all structures reducing their hours and turning away new children because of staff shortages.

A motion to adjourn the House under Standing Order 38 deemed to have been moved.

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

6:30 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to rise today on our first day back in calendar 2023. I am returning to a question that I put to the hon. Minister of Environment on October 20, 2022. It is important to note the date because of the minister's response.

My question cited the Liberal platform in the election of 2021, in which they promised to, “Establish and fully fund a Canada Water Agency in 2022”. It was also promised that they would, “Modernize the 50-year-old Canada Water Act”.

The Minister of Environment responded with, “we are, in fact, working to create an independent water agency for Canada.” He said we needed to pursue this and then at the end of his response, he said, “we will have good news to announce to this House in the coming weeks.”

That was October 20, 2022, and of course, it is true that the last week of January 2023 does fall within weeks after the answer that we received in October, but the nature of the minister's answer, I think it is fair to say, suggested something a bit sooner than some time next year and we are still waiting.

We are now in a period of pre-budget work, and I think it is important to focus now on what the government must include in the budget if it is at all serious about creating a Canada water agency. I note particularly, and it was encouraging to me at the time, that the hon. Minister of Environment and Climate Change used the word “independent” to refer to this agency.

I want to cite that we have quite a lot of good, solid work being done in the NGO community by groups like Flow and others across Canada that work on water policy. There is a strong consensus that the Canada water agency must be independent of the Department of Environment and Climate Change, the Department of Agriculture and Agri-Food, as well as the Department of Natural Resources.

There is a strong call to have an officer of chief water security to work through interjurisdictional blockages and ensure that this country has strong water policy. We know we need to ensure that we have what we used to have in Canada, which was co-operation and shared work between provinces and the federal government, with the federal government in the lead, on programs to avoid flooding.

Flood plain work was shared, anticipating the vulnerabilities of our water system to floods and making sure that we pay attention to water policy, particularly around our freshwater systems, like the Great Lakes or Lake Winnipeg.

It is extraordinarily important that we rebuild the scientific capacity we once had in this country, which is now down to precious little compared to what was there when I worked in the Minister of Environment's office back in the eighties. We had a robust program, an inland waters directorate, near Hamilton. We had a very strong department with hundreds of people working. It has virtually disappeared.

What happened to the “coming weeks”? What happened to the “good news”? When are we going to see an independent Canada water agency that is fully funded to at least $1 billion a year as promised in the platform?

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

6:30 p.m.

Winnipeg South Manitoba

Liberal

Terry Duguid LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the hon. member's question and I appreciated as well the question she put to the minister on October 20 and I appreciated his response. I think the hon. member will agree that a clean and safe freshwater supply in Canada and freshwater systems from coast to coast to coast are essential to the well-being of Canadians and to the health and sustainability of the environment and the economy.

Fresh water sustains life on earth. It supplies drinking water, grows food and supports ecosystems. From droughts to floods to deteriorating water quality, freshwater challenges are intensifying in this country due, in large part, to climate change. There are serious and costly impacts for Canadians and the environment.

As part of the Government of Canada's commitment to protecting fresh water, budget 2022 provided $88.1 million over five years in new funding for Environment and Climate Change Canada, which includes $19.6 million in the 2022-23 budget to sustain the freshwater action plan and this is up for renewal.

However, our funding efforts will now include cleanup efforts in the Great Lakes, the St. Lawrence River, Lake Winnipeg, Lake of the Woods, the Fraser River in my colleague's home province, the Saint John River, the Mackenzie River and Lake Simcoe; $43.5 million, starting in 2022-23, to create the new Canada water agency, which I will advise the hon. member, will be stood up soon, in the coming weeks; and $25 million over five years starting in 2022-23 for the Experimental Lakes Area in northern Ontario, to support freshwater science and research. Members will recall the Harper government tried to shutter that incredible global water resource, but our government is now funding it.

Also, to the hon. member's point, we will be modernizing the Canada Water Act. As she mentioned, for 51 years it has been in place, almost unchanged, and indigenous communities and climate change will be front and centre in our considerations.

In June 2021, Environment and Climate Change Canada published a “what we heard” report. We consulted from coast to coast to coast, we received some 2,700 submissions. We heard strong support for the enhanced availability of data to support decision-making at all levels and cutting-edge science to tackle freshwater challenges, including climate change impacts. In addition to public engagement, the Government of Canada has also engaged with the provinces, territories and indigenous peoples.

The Canada water agency is an institution for our time. It will bring people together on the watershed and the landscapes of this country to better protect and manage our fresh water, which we are so blessed to have. Twenty per cent of the world's fresh water is in this beautiful country of ours.

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

6:35 p.m.

Green

Elizabeth May Green Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC

Mr. Speaker, I know my hon. colleague the parliamentary secretary has a very strong affinity for these issues, from working with him when we were both involved with the International Institute for Sustainable Development. I want to correct the record when I said “near Hamilton”. I cannot believe I forgot that the Inland Waters Directorate, when it was strong, was in Burlington, Ontario and did wonderful work.

I am not comforted by what I have heard so far. Yes, we have the Experimental Lakes Area and it does great work and, yes, I am glad we stopped the Harper government from destroying it. However, the Canada water agency needs to be independent of other departments of government. It needs to be properly funded. We need to understand what is happening to our water. Even if we were not looking at a climate crisis, our approach to fresh water in this country has been pathetic for decades. We now are in a climate crisis, which is a water crisis, and the Canada water agency is urgently needed and must be properly funded.

The EnvironmentAdjournment Proceedings

6:35 p.m.

Liberal

Terry Duguid Liberal Winnipeg South, MB

Mr. Speaker, I would agree with many of the hon. member's points. The hon. member and I go back a long way, as she has alluded to. Again, I take many of her points and ultimately we will see much of that reflected when the Canada water agency is established.

Just in closing, creating the Canada water agency presents a unique opportunity for Canada to work with provinces, territories, indigenous peoples, local authorities, scientists and others to strengthen collaboration and find the best ways to keep our water safe, clean and well managed. As I have said already, in my intervention today, we will be seeing some good news in the coming weeks.

Government PrioritiesAdjournment Proceedings

6:40 p.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Mr. Speaker, over the course of the parliamentary break, we have all had an opportunity to talk to people in our communities and across the country, and it is clear that, after eight years of the Prime Minister's economic and social policies, many people are hurting. There are many people who are struggling in various ways, especially under the profound weight of inflation, and they are asking for all of us to look for solutions that empower them to have jobs and opportunity, and to see their tax dollars respected.

At the same time, we are seeing continuing outrageous extravagance in spending from this government. While Canadians are struggling, the government has been spending so much more, not on helping Canadians, but on things that serve the government's interest, and enrich and empower its friends.

I am asking a follow-up tonight on a question I asked earlier about spending $6,000 a night for a single hotel room. The government spent $6,000 a night on a single hotel room. We asked who stayed in that hotel room. There was some implication that it was the Prime Minister, but we do not know that for sure.

I also mentioned in my question the $54 million spent on the development of an app, the ArriveCAN app, which did not work very well and did more to impede Canadians in their travel than actually facilitate the effective prevention of the transmission of COVID. In any event, if that was the piece of technology the situation called for, which I do not think it was, but if it was, it could have been developed much more quickly at a much lower price and probably be much more effective.

However, we are seeing this trend in outrageous government spending on friends of the government, on external contractors, at a time when Canadians are suffering, which was the question I had asked earlier.

Today, of course, what is big in the news is the fact that the government spent over $100 million in outsourced contracts to McKinsey and Company. I would remind members that McKinsey is managed by Dominic Barton, a close friend of the Prime Minister, and someone who is simultaneously chairing the Prime Minister's economic growth council.

Effectively, Dominic Barton, as the head of McKinsey, is both an adviser to the government and a vendor for the government. With great fanfare, the Prime Minister said that he was only paid a dollar a year for his position leading the economic growth council. Only a dollar a year, but meanwhile we have over $100 million in outsourced contracts over the life of this government so far to McKinsey. We asked today what the exact amount of it was. The government would not provide that number, and it keeps going up every time.

After eight years of this Prime Minister, Canadians are struggling economically. They are struggling under the weight of inflation, which the Governor of the Bank of Canada and the former Governor of the Bank of Canada all say is domestically caused. They are struggling under the weight of those policies. Meanwhile, we are seeing outrageous profligate spending on contracts to friends of the government going out to the McKinsey, $54 million for the ArriveCAN app and $6,000 a night for a hotel room.

Therefore, I want to ask the parliamentary secretary this: How does he and other members of the government face their constituents, who are facing these challenges, and justify this kind of outrageous, unaccountable, nonsensical spending?

Government PrioritiesAdjournment Proceedings

6:40 p.m.

Burnaby North—Seymour B.C.

Liberal

Terry Beech LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance

Mr. Speaker, happy new year to you and to my friend from Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan.

As was stated by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, our government makes every effort to ensure that spending on official trips is both responsible and transparent. The official Canadian delegation included former prime ministers and the Governor General. All members of this delegation stayed at the same hotel, which was uniquely able to accommodate the size of the delegation during levels of extremely high demand, as members can imagine. Literally the entire world was heading to England for the Queen's funeral at the time.

I have not prepared exactitudes on any McKinsey things today, but I do know that there was at least one contract that was issued where McKinsey was tasked to find some savings in a government program and it found $350 million in savings and $178 million of that has been implemented to date. I can get more details. I was not prepared to discuss McKinsey tonight.

I personally had the opportunity as well to connect with my own constituents over the holidays and know that household budgets are being stretched by increases in interest rates, higher rents and higher food prices. Many of these challenges are global challenges created by external stressors, which include lingering effects of the COVID pandemic and, of course, Putin's illegal war in Ukraine. Impacts on the cost of food and energy have been especially significant.

We do have some good news, however. While inflation is high, it has started to go down in Canada. Inflation was 8.1% in June and now is 6.3%. It is still high but it is heading in the right direction and it is lower than what we see in many of our peer economies. The United States still has inflation of 6.5%, the euro area of 9.2%, the United Kingdom of 10.5% and the OECD is also above 10% on average. While increased interest rates present their own burden, especially after rising from historic lows, private sector economists expect inflation to ease toward the 2% inflation target over the next two years.

Canada's underlying economy is still very strong and that gives us the ability to help those who were most impacted by these challenges. In fact, Canada has created more than 659,000 jobs since the start of the pandemic and we have retained our AAA credit rating. We also have the lowest deficit and the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratio in the G7. However, inflation in Canada is still too high and Canadians need help to make ends meet. This is why we have provided targeted relief while ensuring that our measures do not further increase inflation.

For example, we doubled the GST credit for 11 million Canadians who need it the most. This is a great example to start with, of course, because my friend opposite also voted and supported that particular measure.

In addition, we launched the Canada dental benefit for children under 12 with family incomes below $90,000. This will allow up to 500,000 kids to get their teeth fixed. I am pleased to report tonight that 153,000 families have already utilized the program. This is in addition to our child care investments that were just being debated in this House. I am happy to report that just today it was announced that 12,700 $10-a-day child care spaces are now available in British Columbia with more spaces opening up every day across Canada.

Despite these supports, our government is continuing to run a tight fiscal ship. As I stated previously, we are able to make these investments because we have the lowest net debt-to-GDP ratios in the G7. At the same time, we have committed to saving $9 billion from government spending through budget 2022. As Canadians are cutting back in their costs, it is prudent that our government do the same. We will do that. We will make life more affordable for all Canadians right across the country.

Government PrioritiesAdjournment Proceedings

6:45 p.m.

Conservative

Garnett Genuis Conservative Sherwood Park—Fort Saskatchewan, AB

Mr. Speaker, here are the facts. The Prime Minister has more than doubled the national debt in his eight years in office. The Prime Minister has run up more debt in these eight years than all of the previous prime ministers had up until that point. That is the reality of the legacy of the Prime Minister. That is causing inflation. It is causing Canadians to suffer. Of course, some other countries have pursued similar kinds of policies and they are experiencing the same challenges as a result. However, there is a better way. That is to control spending and focus on what is truly important to Canadians.

Much of the growth in spending we have seen, as I talked about, has been to outside consultants. We have dramatic growth in the core public service but, at the same time, we have a government contracting out to consulting firms like McKinsey that it is personally close with for services that are supposed to be done in the core public service. That is driving inflation and driving paying Canadians' experience.

Government PrioritiesAdjournment Proceedings

6:45 p.m.

Liberal

Terry Beech Liberal Burnaby North—Seymour, BC

Mr. Speaker, Canadians can count on us to continue supporting them while proceeding in a way that is fiscally responsible.

In the months ahead as we prepare for the 2023 budget, Canadians can count on this government to continue to work hard to build an economy that works for everyone, to create good jobs and to make life more affordable both for Canadian workers but also for Canadian families.

HealthAdjournment Proceedings

6:45 p.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Mr. Speaker, I know Groundhog Day is not until Thursday, but it sure feels like it, because I keep having to drag the government in here at the end of the day to answer to Canadians on why it has not delivered on its mental health transfer.

We have a system that is overburdened and stretched to the max. I just had the leader of the NDP in my riding. We went to a round table on seniors' health. We listened to the stresses on the system in long-term care, in the health care system, but we also heard from physicians, and members know that in their ridings physicians are saying that they do not have the supports when it comes to mental health and when it comes to social workers and psychotherapy, and this is causing a huge unnecessary burden on the health care system. It is backing up our ERs. We heard that directly from physicians.

I met with the Nuu-Chah-Nulth Tribal Council, with the Huu-ay-aht First Nation, the Hupacasath and the Sechelt. At Sechelt they hosted a meeting, and they said their top priority is ensuring there are mental health supports.

The New Democrats will kick and scream and drag the government back here every night, if we have to, until the transfer is delivered. We will use every tool in the tool box. The Liberals promised $4.5 billion of new money over five years to help support those with mental health issues.

I not only heard from first nations, but I actually went into my own doctor's office and asked my doctor how it is impacting him in serving his clients and the overall community. He said that over 50% of the people who were coming to his office were having a health-related issue related to either mental health or substance use. He said that he cannot be a social worker. He said that people are leaving the field. He said nurses are leaving the field.

Right now, in a health crisis, we need to do everything we can to take the pressure off those who need supports that are physical-related and ensure those who have mental health issues are getting supports that are mental health-related. Meanwhile, people are dying. I got a message from a good friend of mine who lost her son this week. She said we need treatment centres, not more police. We need investments in mental health supports. The government keeps promising it is going to deliver that.

There was a joint report by the Mental Health Commission of Canada and the Canadian Centre on Substance Use and Addiction. They found that almost 35% of residents reported moderate to severe mental health concerns. Fewer than one in three people experiencing mental health issues were accessing services, and they said that financial constraints were a big part of that. As we know, we are potentially heading into a recession. People are struggling. Mental health issues are getting worse.

Establishing the Canada mental health transfer was a key election promise. It was the second thing on the list in the mandate letter for the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions. The government promised that $875 million would be transferred by 2023. There has not been a dollar of new money.

What are we going to hear from the government members? They are going to pat themselves on the back from old money. They are not going to have delivered on the new money they promised. It has not happened. It is costing lives. People are dying, and it is unnecessary. The government needs to do the right thing. The Liberals are wastefully spending money instead of prioritizing the health of Canadians, taking pressure off our health care system and investing in mental health when Canadians need it the most.

HealthAdjournment Proceedings

6:50 p.m.

Sherbrooke Québec

Liberal

Élisabeth Brière LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Mental Health and Addictions and Associate Minister of Health

Mr. Speaker, even though it is late, I want to thank the member for Courtenay—Alberni for giving me the opportunity to speak to this important matter and explain to the House what we are doing to support mental health and health care services for people who use substances.

Mental health is health. This is why we have made historic investments to support mental health care and substance use care needs, including $5 billion over 10 years, to improve Canadians' access to mental health and substance use services, directly to provinces and territories through bilateral agreements.

These agreements currently provide the provinces and territories with $600 million per year until 2027. That money helps expand access to mental health care, addiction services for youth, and integrated services for people with complex needs. It helps improve access to proven community mental health care models and culturally appropriate interventions linked to primary care services.

Federal, provincial and territorial health and mental health ministers agree on the importance of promoting mental wellness and addressing gaps in mental health and addiction services and recovery.

In November, the minister met her counterparts across the country to discuss these key points. Through these bilateral agreements, the FPT health and mental health ministers are working together to improve access to evidence-supported mental health and addiction services and supports for Canadians and their families.

We also acted quickly to respond to the increased demand for mental health services and supports arising from the pandemic.

Early on in the pandemic, we launched Wellness Together Canada to provide free, confidential mental health support online 24/7 to people across Canada in both official languages.

Over 3.1 million people have accessed Wellness Together online, and the app has been downloaded over 35,000 times.

Budget 2022 will provide $140 million for the Wellness Together Canada portal so it can continue to provide Canadians with tools and services to support their mental health and well-being.

We recognize that some communities experienced a disproportionate impact on their mental health because of the pandemic. We are providing $100 million over three years to support projects that promote mental health and an additional $50 million over two years for mental health programs that support populations at high risk of experiencing pandemic-related trauma.

In addition, budget 2022 will provide $227.6 million over two years to maintain trauma-informed, indigenous-led, culturally appropriate services to improve mental wellness and continue to implement distinctions-based mental health and wellness strategies.

However, we know more needs to be done to ensure Canadians can access the high quality mental health care and substance use services they need and deserve, both now and in the future.

The Prime Minister will be meeting with premiers next week to ensure the sustainability of our health care system for years to come and that further investments deliver tangible, positive outcomes.

HealthAdjournment Proceedings

6:55 p.m.

NDP

Gord Johns NDP Courtenay—Alberni, BC

Mr. Speaker, like I said, we know Thursday is Groundhog Day, but the government decided today is Groundhog Day. We heard the same response and the same old thing. Liberals are patting themselves on the backs about money they promised from before and are spending, but look at the results. The results speak for themselves with overcrowded ERs and doctors having to do social work who need help.

People are dying as a result of the government's inaction. It failed to deliver a dollar of the promised new money. I actually do not believe it is going to do it. The Prime Minister has directed his ministers to spend less money, and I think he is going to cut. The government has no intention of delivering on this transfer. It has been over a year and a half.

The U.K. and France spend about 12% on mental health. We spend between 5% and 7%. It is time for the government to respond. It needs to answer to Canadians on why it has not delivered on this promise.

I will be back. I will be back at every opportunity to hold them to account until they deliver the mental health supports people desperately need.